CALIFORNIA SCREAMIN'

No significant threat

Michael P. Ackley has worked more than three decades as a journalist, the majority of that time at the Sacramento Union. His experience includes reporting, editing and writing commentary. He retired from teaching journalism for California State University at Hayward.

Editor’s note: Michael Ackley’s columns may include satire and parody based on current, events, and thus mix fact with fiction. He assumes informed readers will be able to tell the difference.

Economist Art Laffer said last week – regarding the “sequester” budget cuts (which aren’t really cuts) that he could not believe a federal administration would deliberately take actions to hurt the American people. What a sweet man!

Now, back to the real world:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement cut loose more than 2,200 “detainees” before sequestration, including many “Level One” offenders. (Let’s just call them felons.)

Still, ICE declared, “Priority for detention remains on serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety.”

We asked ICE official Howard Bashford why “detainees” were cut loose before budget cuts were made.

“Our top priority is public safety,” he said, “and we can’t assure public safety if we overrun our budget.”

Asked why not, he said, “Because.”

As for the freed felons, Bashford said, “They aren’t serious offenders. In fact, some of them are downright funny – if you get to know them.

“They don’t pose a significant threat – a threat maybe, but not a significant threat. Besides, they remain under supervision.”

Pressed to define “supervision,” the ICE functionary said, “We know the neighborhoods where they hang out. If they really need supervision, we’re fairly sure we can find them.”

The Bill Clinton test: California Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, has a bill in the legislative hopper that would give homosexuals the right to insurance coverage for infertility.

Never mind that same-sex couples are inherently infertile. In fact, the homophile community implicitly recognizes this fact, as its cultural vernacular refers to heterosexuals as “breeders.”

And just so there’s no confusion (no confusion?) the bill provides this definition: “…’infertility’ means either 1) the presence of a demonstrated condition recognized by a licensed physician and surgeon as a cause of infertility, or 2) the inability to conceive a pregnancy or to carry a pregnancy to a live birth after a year or more of regular sexual relations without contraception.”

It is not explained why a homosexual couple would use contraception in the first place, nor does it define “regular sexual relations.”

We are left with the image of Ed and Bill, weeping and wringing their hands as a compassionate physician, tells them, “Really, neither of you is to blame.”

Perhaps insurance companies will be able to avoid provision of such coverage by employing the Bill Clinton test. You know. What was going on wasn’t really sex. It was just an exercise involving the reproductive system.

Ammiano, as a “gay” San Franciscan, frequently submits bills to “protect” the LGBTQRSTUV community. Previously, he submitted legislation requiring public schools to assure that transgender students would be able to participate in sports and use the restrooms that fit their self-defined sexual identities.

Can you escape the image of Buck, a 220-pound linebacker, using the girls’ lavatory? Could happen.

More San Francisco brilliance: State Sen. Mark Leno, who competes with Ammiano in the drafting of hare-brained legislation, wants to enable cities and counties to extend that “last call” for booze by two hours, to 4 a.m.

He reasons this would make California more competitive with places like New York City and Las Vegas, where alcohol flows more freely. He says this would stimulate the economy.

He said, “Given that we compete, not only nationally but internationally, for conventions and visitors, we are at a disadvantage because our cities don’t have this option,” he said. “That’s all it is. It imposes nothing on anybody.”

Leno didn’t say so, but as California drunk drivers already kill 3,000 or 4,000 people annually, wouldn’t it be a boon to the funeral industry?

Smear? What smear? The Los Angeles Times headlined its analysis of the Mitch McConnell office bugging “Anatomy of a Smear.” The column by Robin Abcarian discussed the content of the illegally obtain discussion, which was a brainstorming session about actress Ashley Judd.

Judd, you will recall, was considering a run for McConnell’s U.S. Senate seat. She dropped the idea, probably concluding, like McConnell’s staff, that she was an easy target, based on her own pronouncements.

Although the Times’ headline mentioned “smear,” Abcarian never did. She merely noted – as did the McConnell people – the potential candidate’s vulnerability. Journalists are at the mercy of the copy desk once they let go of their stories. Headline writers are increasingly comfortable about inserting their own prejudices.

However, the episode merits an entry in the Blind Partisan’s Dictionary:

Smear: n. – as defined by the left wing, the use of a candidate’s own words or actions to impeach his qualifications for office. Also see, “mean-spirited.”

Receive Michael Ackley's commentaries in your email

BONUS: By signing up for Michael Ackley's alerts, you will also be signed up for news and special offers from WND via email.

Name*

FirstLast

Email*

Where we will email your daily updates

Postal code*

A valid zip code or postal code is required

Click the button below to sign up for Michael Ackley's commentaries by email, and keep up to date with special offers from WND. You may change your email preferences at any time.